Friendship, the modern world has evolved beyond political systems that solely rely on the views and thoughts of a single human being. Suppose Muhammad Rasulullah is the ideal human being that you greatly admire. I would still argue that he can't be the founding principle of a new political system. Every citizen in a modern political system has the right to approve or reject the views of Muhammad Rasulullah. Every citizen in a modern political system has the right to believe in God or not believe in God.

"Secularism is the principle of separation of government institutions, and the persons mandated to represent the State, from religious institutions and religious dignitaries. Secularism may assert the right to be free from religious rule and teachings, and the right to freedom from governmental imposition of religion upon the people within a state that is neutral on matters of belief.

Secularism draws its intellectual roots from Greek and Roman philosophers such as Marcus Aurelius and Epicurus; medieval Muslim polymaths such as Ibn Rushd; Enlightenment thinkers such as Denis Diderot, Voltaire, Baruch Spinoza, John Locke, James Madison, Thomas Jefferson, and Thomas Paine; and more recent freethinkers, agnostics, and atheists such as Robert Ingersoll and Bertrand Russell."

Do you think Muhammad Rasulullah should be on this list? If yes, how did he contribute to secularism?

A religion that's intolerant of other religions can't be the world's best religion --Abdel Samad
Great minds discuss ideas. Average minds discuss events. Small minds discuss people--Eleanor Roosevelt

You said: Do you think Muhammad Rasulullah should be on this list? If yes, how did he contribute to secularism?

Response. I have read about secularism and I am one of those believers in the activity of Muhammad with a different idea of secularism. I am averse to using Greek terminology in place of what Allah revealed to His messengers as an absolute and solid way of peace and enjoyment. I prefer the use of the word 'Islam' to 'religion'. Therefore your: Secularism is the principle of separation of government institutions,
and the persons mandated to represent the State, from religious
institutions and religious dignitaries. Secularism may assert the right
to be free from religious rule and teachings, and the right to freedom
from governmental imposition of religion upon the people within a state
that is neutral on matters of belief, is not the same as :Secularism is the principle of separation of government institutions,
and the persons mandated to represent the State, from Islamic
institutions and Islamic dignitaries. Secularism may assert the right
to be free from Islamic rule and teachings, and the right to freedom
from governmental imposition of Islam upon the people within a state
that is neutral on matters of belief. I am sure you know that Islam means submission to that G-d who rescued the Children of Israel our revered cousins from the pangs and hardships in Egypt and worked those miracles never seen by you and me. Anyway I visited the Cairo museum 3 times and saw the body of Pharaoh mentioned in the Qur'an. Can you then explain how the Greek intellectuals coined that name and why it is accepted by you the 'Christians,? My understanding of secularism is the acceptance of mankind to anything that is beneficial to them and rejecting anything that is harmful to them. Before my retirement, I treated a severe burns using honey after every treatment seemed to be failing. I read this in the teaching of Muhammad. Muhammad said one is not allowed to be impoverished or to sleep with an empty stomach. Allah will punish in the Hereafter the Islamic leader who does that! Incidentally, are you saying that Muhammad will not give stipends to those Jews and Christians living under his Islamic state today? Muhammad gave them priority over his companions! Please note that Islamic State is not concomitant to what is going on in Saudi Arabia or any so called Arab Muslim countries.If Muhammad and his companions were alive today, I am sure they will travel to Tabuk by air, to Makka by air. I am sure he will never manufacture cluster bombs or his actions and behavior be a cause of unemployment and recession.

Friendship, the modern world has evolved beyond political systems that solely rely on the views and thoughts of a single human being. Suppose Muhammad Rasulullah is the ideal human being that you greatly admire. I would still argue that he can't be the founding principle of a new political system. Every citizen in a modern political system has the right to approve or reject the views of Muhammad Rasulullah. Every citizen in a modern political system has the right to believe in God or not believe in God."Secularism is the principle of separation of government institutions, and the persons mandated to represent the State, from religious institutions and religious dignitaries. Secularism may assert the right to be free from religious rule and teachings, and the right to freedom from governmental imposition of religion upon the people within a state that is neutral on matters of belief.Secularism draws its intellectual roots from Greek and Roman philosophers such as Marcus Aurelius and Epicurus; medieval Muslim polymaths such as Ibn Rushd; Enlightenment thinkers such as Denis Diderot, Voltaire, Baruch Spinoza, John Locke, James Madison, Thomas Jefferson, and Thomas Paine; and more recent freethinkers, agnostics, and atheists such as Robert Ingersoll and Bertrand Russell."Do you think Muhammad Rasulullah should be on this list? If yes, how did he contribute to secularism?

Matt,
you wrote:
"Friendship, the modern world has evolved beyond political systems that solely rely on the views and thoughts of a single human being. Suppose Muhammad Rasulullah is the ideal human being that you greatly admire. I would still argue that he can't be the founding principle of a new political system. Every citizen in a modern political system has the right to approve or reject the views of Muhammad Rasulullah. Every citizen in a modern political system has the right to believe in God or not believe in God."
That is how it was in the Prophet's time. No one was forced to believe him. Those (many) who believed him did so out of their free will,and those (many) who did not believe in him to be the prophet did so out of their free will. He established a system, where each one has the right to choose after the warning from God has reached. He warned of the consequences in the hereafter as we do today to those who reject God.
So, it is not true that the current political system was the first one to give a person to decide for themselves what they wanted to believe. What people do out of their own understanding and actions is another story liek with any other belief or system, but the Quran is clear on this matter.

2:256 (Y. Ali) Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from Error: whoever rejects evil and believes in Allah hath grasped the most trustworthy hand-hold, that never breaks. And Allah heareth and knoweth all things.

Hasan

39:64 Proclaim: Is it some one other than God that you order me to worship, O you ignorant ones?"

There is no solution to our problem without establishing the caliph and caliphate. Its is not total theocracy, but rather the only way the world will enjoy stability and peace.

And by "peace", you mean submission to Muslim rule. No thanks.

The solution to our problem is to stop thinking in terms of one side subjugating the other. Peace will come to those who concentrate on controlling their own thoughts and behaviours, without trying to control others. That is the greater jihad.

Ron,
wrong, it will come by controlling those who try to control others, occupy their land to steal and subjugate and enslave like we have seen in the past few centuries.
Hasan

39:64 Proclaim: Is it some one other than God that you order me to worship, O you ignorant ones?"

wrong, it will come by controlling those who try to control others, occupy their land to steal and subjugate and enslave like we have seen in the past few centuries.

I'm not sure I understand you, Hasan. Do you approve of people trying to control others, or do you oppose it? Or does it depend on who is doing the controlling, i.e. do you hold others to a different moral standard than yourself?

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot create polls in this forumYou cannot vote in polls in this forum

Disclaimer:
The opinions expressed herein contain positions and viewpoints that are not necessarily those of IslamiCity. This forum is offered to stimulate dialogue and discussion in our continuing mission of being an educational organization.
If there is any issue with any of the postings please email to icforum at islamicity.com or if you are a forum's member you can use the report button.